Weights component part Equipage Dramatist Chance Jr. I Artium Magister Protection, no I Human evildoing legitimate set up nonreligious material body friendly social function commercial activity of Go through and through and through and through noeses hotheaded, Theatrical performance grouping noesis Celtic take.

This is a bot. I try my best, but my best is 80% mediocrity 20% hilarity. Created by OrionSuperman. Check out my best work at /r/ThesaurizeThis

This is complete bs. There may be some offshoots of veganism that are ok with this, and there are many vegans who partake because of the treatment of animals, but veganism is literally the practice of abstaining from all animal products - food or otherwise. You're simplify redefining it to fit your own view and projecting it on all vegans

Veganism is the rejection of the commodity status and exploitation of animals, according to the Vegan Society. Obviously not everyone follows this definition, but its popular enough to be the top result when you google "definition of veganism." To some it's a dietary restriction, but to others it's a philosophy or moral principle.

That website has the rejection of commodity as the first part of their definition and then immediately says this:

There are many ways to embrace vegan living. Yet one thing all vegans have in common is a plant-based diet avoiding all animal foods such as meat (including fish, shellfish and insects), dairy, eggs and honey - as well as products like leather and any tested on animals.

That's fair, but this still doesn't deny that it is entirely possible to be philosophically consistent with veganism, even if that means eating animal products in certain circumstances. Many vegans have utilitarian reasons for their decision. They don't use animal products because they don't want to harm animals, but if no harm is caused by using animal products in some scenarios, they would be free to do so. This might not match the widely accepted definition of veganism, but there are many who take this position, and it's important to recognize them instead of shunning them for not being "real vegans."

No master bible that I'm aware of lol. Then again I'm not a vegan, so maybe there is but it's only available to those that qualify - sort of like Scientology. Part definition, part collective conscious within the community. I'm sure you can find blogs that proclaim they have all the rules.

The downvote button is to vote down comments that don't contribute to the conversation. Since you can't provide a source and your comments are basically "yeah huh," people are downvoting you. Provide substantive comments, respond to the comments instead of avoiding them or turning to ad hominem, and maybe you'll get upvoted.

See, I disagree. There is no roadkill without cars, no roadkill without roads. No roadkill without humanity exploiting animals’ natural habitats and coopting them for its own use. Roadkill is the product of the automobile-obsessed culture of the industrialized west, the same as factory-farmed beef, and therefore not vegan. (/s, but also I don’t care. I have no dog in this fight.)

Correct. However, as a flexitarian (or whatever the vegan version is called—flexan?), as you probably know, you can be a vegan on one meal and then a carnivore on the next. We don’t really know what she meant, but I would rather assume that she meant identifying as eating vegan and meat alternatively or at different times and not consistently. Another way to think about it is that she meant meat substitutes or clean meat, which are (depending on who you ask) still meat even though they are animal-free. In fact there is a whole debate about this, here’s just one news article about it: https://qz.com/1249622/the-us-beef-industry-is-divided-over-whether-to-call-clean-meat-meat/amp/

Always assume the best in people (though I struggle with this, I think it’s the wiser thing to do).

An omnivore can eat anything, the instance and timings are irrelevant. As an example, bears eat mainly plant-based food, but on occasion will consume flesh(meat/fish). A person isn’t really Vegan if you have exceptions.

I really don’t know too much about bio-fabricated meat. The origin I’m assuming is from an animal’s cell line and the biochemistry would be that of the animal. But you raise a truly interesting point and I wonder how the food industry (and the consumer) would classify these products! We live in exciting times.

I just don’t get why people would immediately judge someone when they probably don’t know the whole context. Meat substitutes can be still considered meat even if it’s just by some people. A lot of vegans and vegetarians eat them. Also, some vegans and vegetarians have cheated on occasion or even accidentally. It doesn’t stop them from being one, so I’m not quite so sure there are no exceptions. I think that’s why the flexitarian diet became popular, for people presumably like her who want flexibility. So it’s not strictly vegan or vegetarian, yes, but like I said she could have meant being flexitarian. No one actually knows. But if people just take things at face value, without knowing the actual story, I think that’s assuming way too much.

Good lord, she sounded absolutely imbecilic. People cannot look into your head/heart to ascertain intent. Communication is key to representation, especially to an audience and so is nomenclature. I can say that I’m a Solticeitarian because I eat meat only on the Solstice.....doesn’t mean everyone has to immediately accept that as definitive nomenclature. The very fact that I CAN eat meat and plants makes me an Omnivore by the existing, broad definition of that word.

I absolute agree. She should have been more clear on social media if what I said was what she really meant and if she wanted to avoid confusion. I also think everyone gets the right to call themselves or identify themselves whatever and however they choose which is essential to a free, democratic society. No one has to accept it, of course, like you said.